pete_manc_UK said:That is right, and it stops being right at the edges.
Second this. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.
pete_manc_UK said:That is right, and it stops being right at the edges.
Coming at pete_manc_UK’s question from a different direction. It is worth asking what the claim would look like if it were false. If nothing would look different, it is not a claim about the world and no amount of discussion will settle it.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it. Reconstructing a timeline from memory three months later is how people end up unable to answer the one question that would have resolved it.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsA narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
lisa_labSD said:One practical note: write down what you did and when, before you need it.
Pushing back on lisa_labSD here. I think the framing smuggles in the conclusion. Ask it the other way round and the obvious answer reverses, which usually means the question is doing the work.